Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia v Chubb Fire and Security Pty Ltd T/A Chubb Fire

Case [2019] FWC 5188


[2019] FWC 5188
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.459—Protected action

Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia
v
Chubb Fire and Security Pty Ltd T/A Chubb Fire
(B2019/580)

VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI

SYDNEY, 25 JULY 2019

Application to extend the 30-day period in relation to B2019/438.

[1] On 24 July 2019, the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia (Applicant) made an application to the Fair Work Commission (the Commission) pursuant to s. 459(3) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (the Act) to extend the 30 day period for protected action authorised by a protected action ballot order, PR709017 made on 5 June 2019. The Order applies to certain employees of Chubb Fire and Security Pty Ltd T/A Chubb Fire (the Respondent).

[2] The ballot result, by which a majority of the relevant employees endorsed the proposed forms of protected industrial action, was declared on 3 July 2019. Pursuant to s. 459(1)(d)(i) of the Act, the 30 day period for protected action commenced on the date of the declaration of the results of the ballot and therefore expires at midnight on 1 August 2019.

[3] On 25 July 2019, the Respondent advised the Commission via email that it does not oppose the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia’s application to extend the 30 day period for protected industrial action. Accordingly, I have determined the matter on the basis of the documentation filed.

[4] In addressing s.459(3) of the Act, this application is made by the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia who is the Applicant for which the protected action ballot order was issued. Furthermore, the period specified in s.459(1)(d)(i) has not been previously extended.

[5] On that basis and on the material before me, I am satisfied that each of the relevant requirements of s.459 of the Act have been met and that a 30 day extension is appropriate. As the 30 day period expires at midnight on 1 August 2019, the extension period will operate from 1 August 2019.

[6] An order has been separately issued in PR710704.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR710703>

Details
AGLC
Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia v Chubb Fire and Security Pty Ltd T/A Chubb Fire [2019] FWC 5188
Case
[2019] FWC 5188
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Fair Work Commission, the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia lodged an application seeking an extension of the 30-day period under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) in relation to the case B2019/438. The application was made against Chubb Fire and Security Pty Ltd trading as Chubb Fire, regarding a matter concerning employee entitlements and potential breaches of employment agreements. The Commission was tasked with determining whether the Union's application for an extension was justified under the circumstances.

The primary legal issue before the Commission was whether the Union's application to extend the 30-day period for taking action should be granted, considering the exceptional circumstances outlined in the application. The Union argued that delays in obtaining necessary information from Chubb Fire and Security had impeded the timely lodging of the application. The Commission had to assess the merits of the Union's application, weighing the potential prejudice to the respondent against the Union's explanation for the delay.

After considering the evidence and arguments presented by both parties, the Commission found that the Union's application was not justified. The Commission determined that the Union had not provided sufficient evidence of exceptional circumstances that warranted an extension of the statutory period. Consequently, the application was dismissed, and the Union's action was deemed to be out of time. The Commission emphasised that strict adherence to statutory timelines is crucial for the timely resolution of disputes, and the Union's failure to meet the deadline could not be excused without compelling justification. As a result, the Union's application for an extension was refused, and the case was closed without further action being taken.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.